pull down to refresh
55 sats \ 10 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi OP 5 Nov \ on: Trump’s worst nightmare wins New York. Mamdani shows how Trump can be defeated. Politics_And_Law
Being a believer in the scientific reality and threat of climate change and disliking road congestion as a horrendous waste of time and energy the idea of free public transport seems excellent.
Here in New Zealand almost everyone drives a car as it is easier and often no more expensive than taking public transport.
If public transport is made free to use then the roads would be much less congested with all these cars with a single driver. It is such a waste.
Free public transport is an example of where increased economic (and environmental) performance and efficiency can sometimes be achieved via government participation that no free market will ever provide.
reply
Yes fair point- it would IMO ideally be funded buy a tax on fuel.
Reduced road congestion would reduce the fuel costs for the remaining road users while those who move to use the free public transport then have increased discretionary income and spend on other things.
Transport costs overall are reduced by increased system wide efficiency and consumer spending is redirected toward other uses (or savings) and stimulates those suppliers/markets.
30-40 people on a bus use a lot less road and fuel than 30-40 cars each with a single occupant.
The cost savings are significant.
Most people are better off.
reply
Ya, that is not gonna work imo. I have many thoughts on why that won't work but simply put: As bus use increases, the cost of free bus service soars and your funding source is simultaneously shrinking due to increased taxation on fuel users, which prices them out of using that good.
No free lunches, as they say.
reply
There would be a balance and it would not work in all markets but I think the basic logic will work in some circumstances...especially larger already congested cities.
Like New York.
Where you get increased efficiency by moving people from multiple individual cars into single bus or train lines there is an inherent gain.
In Asia is it common for a factory or other business to provide free transport to work via van/bus- workers spend time together on way to work informally preparing for the day, and saving time and money.
It is partly about mindset in the west of the individual rules but when it comes to mass transport the car is hugely inefficient.
Roading is not a free market mechanism- it is hugely subsidised by local and national taxes and so the car based transport system is not a true free market- it is subsidised by the taxes I pay.
I would prefer those taxes go toward free public transport, reduced road congestion, increased efficiency and reduced GHG emissions.
Powerful fuel and transport lobbyists will fight such proposals so it will be interesting to see how it works out in NYC.
reply
ya, that is true it certainly is not cultural in the US. If it was gonna work anywhere, it would probably be NYC. Its so hard to know the second order effects (good and bad) of such things...which I think that is lost in these kind of progressive proposals (good effects overestimated, bad effects ignored/understated). Hard to imagine it having a chance in any other part of the US with so little population density.
Something about the whole proposal though seems a bit redundant though. When NYC already has an expansive subway system, why not just work on improving / making that free? Seems odd to make buses free and ignore the existing infrastructure (or is the proposal to make subway free too and it just is a good tagline to say 'free buses'?)
reply
Don't know the detail in NYC and would have hoped the entire public transit system could be made free but perhaps buses serve the margins which feed into the subway system?
Guess you would need to introduce such a change progressively (no pun intended) and start somewhere. Free subway could be prone to overload perhaps.
On cost, in my city here in NZ (popn 500,000) we have only buses, no subway and the buses are ~70% subsidised but not free.
The cost to use the bus is roughly equal to the cost of fuel to drive the same route, and so there is little incentive for most people to use the bus- so the buses are mostly empty.
I would rather increase the subsidy to 100% and get the busses fully utilised and get greatly reduced road congestion and GHG emissions in return for my taxes.
reply
reply
Yes I agree that is a significant barrier.
We are sold the car as a symbol of individual freedom - only to end up in gridlock.
You only need to shift 10% of commuters from using the car to public transport to get a significantly larger reduction in road congestion at peak traffic times.
Making public transport free to use in already highly congested cities could incentivise enough people to make the move and deliver better outcomes for most people.